jet boats vs inboard/outboard for general purpose use
 

I have a few options in front of me for a upcoming purchase. My
previous boat was a large tri-hull deck boat with a 235 Evinrude
outboard. I am looking at either a '92 Maxxim open bow runabout for
$8000 (4 cycle 4.3L i/o), a 2000 Yamaha LST 1200 for $10000 (2 cycle
twin engine jet drive), or a 2002 Seadoo Challenger 2000 for $15000 (2
cycle single engine jet drive). Hours condition of all is unknown,
although they all look well taken care of for their age. I will use it
in a fresh water river reserviour which is somewhat narrow (compared to
a big open lake), but can get choppy when its crowded. Its in a dock
during the summer if that makes any difference. I mostly ski, tube,
swim, and such. No fishing. I sometimes entertain big crowds, but its
usually 3-5 people. Fuel economy is obviously a factor nowadays
($2.86/gal last weekend).

My experiance is only with the big outboard and my Superjet jet-ski, so
I am looking for some advice from those who might know more about this.
I do not have a good gut feel for all the factors involved. Can some
of the experts on this group give me some insight.

BTW, I need to make a decision in a week or so.

Thanks
Paul

wrote in message
oups.com...
I have a few options in front of me for a upcoming purchase. My
previous boat was a large tri-hull deck boat with a 235 Evinrude
outboard. I am looking at either a '92 Maxxim open bow runabout for
$8000 (4 cycle 4.3L i/o), a 2000 Yamaha LST 1200 for $10000 (2 cycle
twin engine jet drive), or a 2002 Seadoo Challenger 2000 for $15000 (2
cycle single engine jet drive). Hours condition of all is unknown,
although they all look well taken care of for their age. I will use it
in a fresh water river reserviour which is somewhat narrow (compared to
a big open lake), but can get choppy when its crowded. Its in a dock
during the summer if that makes any difference. I mostly ski, tube,
swim, and such. No fishing. I sometimes entertain big crowds, but its
usually 3-5 people. Fuel economy is obviously a factor nowadays
($2.86/gal last weekend).


The fuel economy issue alone should be enough to make you think twice about
the two-stroke squirt boats. I bought a 1997 Sea-Doo Challenger 1800 last
year as a toy companion to the bigger boat. Thought it would be a kick.
Sold it a year later. Always regretted not just buying a an I/O runabout
instead. The twin Bombardier two strokes were fussy, required significant
maintenance, and sucked fuel big-time, given that they only had to push
around a small 18 footer. To add insult to injury, the cost of the Sea-Doo
two-stroke oil ($40 per gallon) effectively added $1.00 per gallon to the
cost of fuel. I was always amazed that the 2,000 pound Sea-Doo got only
twice the fuel mileage as my 12,000 pound Sea Ray with twin 5.7 Merc I/O's.
About 2.5 mpg for the Sea-Doo vs. 1.3 mpg for the Sea Ray. Seemed pretty
lopsided to me, given that the Sea-Doo weighed in at one-sixth the weight of
the Sea Ray. The squirt was fun to fart around in, but on balance, it
turned out to be a poor choice for me. Fortunately, I bought it used and it
was an extraordinarily clean boat for its age, so I was able to sell it for
pretty close to what I paid for it. The advantages to the jet are 1.) no
chance to carve up a swimmer/skier/tuber due to negligent operation by the
skipper, and 2.) no appendage hanging down to strike submerged objects in
shallow water operation. If those issues are more important to you than
relatively low maintenance and relatively economical operation, then perhaps
you should consider either of the jet boats. Otherwise, look hard at the
Maxum or something equivalent.

Given the same power, jets use more gas than prop driven boats!

wrote in message
oups.com...
I have a few options in front of me for a upcoming purchase. My
previous boat was a large tri-hull deck boat with a 235 Evinrude
outboard. I am looking at either a '92 Maxxim open bow runabout for
$8000 (4 cycle 4.3L i/o), a 2000 Yamaha LST 1200 for $10000 (2 cycle
twin engine jet drive), or a 2002 Seadoo Challenger 2000 for $15000 (2
cycle single engine jet drive). Hours condition of all is unknown,
although they all look well taken care of for their age. I will use it
in a fresh water river reserviour which is somewhat narrow (compared to
a big open lake), but can get choppy when its crowded. Its in a dock
during the summer if that makes any difference. I mostly ski, tube,
swim, and such. No fishing. I sometimes entertain big crowds, but its
usually 3-5 people. Fuel economy is obviously a factor nowadays
($2.86/gal last weekend).

My experiance is only with the big outboard and my Superjet jet-ski, so
I am looking for some advice from those who might know more about this.
I do not have a good gut feel for all the factors involved. Can some
of the experts on this group give me some insight.

BTW, I need to make a decision in a week or so.

Thanks
Paul

I don't see jets as a good general purpose option for a boat. Some of
the problems mentioned above are fuel economy and dependability.
Jets in boats are either a novelty or a performance choice. I've got
a jetski that's a blast, but a jet in them is the only choice that I
know
of, and I've got two friends with jet boats that are pure, adrenalin-
driven excitement.

Michael

wrote in message
oups.com...
I don't see jets as a good general purpose option for a boat. Some of
the problems mentioned above are fuel economy and dependability.
Jets in boats are either a novelty or a performance choice. I've got
a jetski that's a blast, but a jet in them is the only choice that I
know
of, and I've got two friends with jet boats that are pure, adrenalin-
driven excitement.

Michael


The 2 stroke jet boats are not for the fuel conscious. And for those prices
you are looking at a small boat. For 6 people you will need at least a 20'
boat. I run a 21' aluminum jet boat, 3400#. 1991 and get about 85% the
efficiency of a prop boat. With a 351W Ford engine I got about 2 mpg as an
average. Just changed to a 350 mpi engine, and I think the fuel mileage is
better. We fish, ski and tube with the boat and also run it in shallow
rivers. If just in a lake setting where you are not needing the shallow
water / durability of a jet drive go prop. Dependability is better for a 4
stroke jet drive than a prop. Lots less moving parts, and no drive
direction changes. Just do not run the drive without water. Takes out the
rubber cutlass bearings and the front pump seal. www.riverjetmagazine.com
will give you some points on the aluminum boats.

the jet will use more gas a prop. so unless a jet is wanted for its
advantages, which it has like:

- runs shallow
- boat can break (as in stop)
- doesnt hack up people
- fun to drive

so if you do not need any of that, then get a prop. Stay away from
rotax jets, as others said they are high maintenance.

If you decide on a jet then get a boat which has a MERCURY SPORTJET
with a 200 HP or 250 HP OPTIMAX. These will get very good mileage. My
boat is 19 foot with a 200 Optimax Jet and cruises with 2 people and
light gear at 5.8 MPG ! Cant complain about that :)

Matt

As others have mentioned, jet boats are intrinsically less-efficient
than prop boats. Additionally, 2 Cycle engines typically consume more
fuel than 4 cycle engines and there is the added cost of oil. Also, in
my parts, some lakes are banning 2 Cycle engines that are not direct
injected. Last, I find I/O's very manuverable boats with little throttle
needed (idle) to navigate at low speeds in docking situations.

b.

.... just dont let Karen know you are getting an Optimax Anything ;)

HarryKrause wrote:
wrote:
... just dont let Karen know you are getting an Optimax Anything ;)


Karen Smith? The know-nothing hag from down under?
Easy to dismiss.

I was kidding ;) But Karen does seem to be knowledgeable. However,
one does not have to be a rocket scientist to see that you and her dont
necessarily .. umm .. well ... lets say .. "get along"

Thanks for everybodies help! I purchased a '98 open bow runabout w/
4.3 Mercrusier over the weekend.